If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Evolution is not denied in the scientific community, but there are those who persist in saying the scientists are all atheists pushing their agenda. But, in Darwin's time there were scientific skeptics.

Since we are now 30% above stable historic concentrations this means that we humans are basically responsible for the entire amount above the long term average.

What of the fact that, if we go back to 1400 (or whatever) there are a whole lot more people now than there were then?

And there is more population in places like China and Africa than in developed countries like the US ... and those dense population areas are typically creating more CO2 by burning dirty coal or, even wood and dung, than the developed countries who are burning cleaner fuels.

So ... rather than bringing developed countries down to third-world economic levels through carbon taxing ... why not start with bringing cleaner fuels to those countries that are busily creating scads more CO2? Wouldn't there be greater impact on the CO2 levels by focusing on the places that are creating the most of it?

As the price of heating oil and electricity has soared, there are a lot of people in suburban and rural areas that are now using wood stoves, coal stoves, and pellet stoves. I recall reading somewhere that the carbon tax law that had been proposed would have included "confiscaton" of all those alternative sources of heating.

If we make the assumption that CO2 has some bearing on climate change, and we do what we think we can to limit CO2 levels, we also know that climate has a lot to do with sunspot activity. I don't think anyone has any ideas yet on how to do anything about controlling that.

We also know (or believe we know) that stars, like our sun, ultimately burn themselves out. We can't control that. The only thing we can do about that is anticipate and adapt ... in the case of the ultimate demise of the sun, that would mean adapting by preparing to move. Adapting would mean locating a place to move to, and mastering transportation to that new location.

Then, I stop to think ... if Iran gets its nuclear capability, they're just wacky enough to make this small talk about COs levels become a moot point.

G.Clinchy@gmail.com"Know in your heart that all things are possible. We couldn't conceive of a miracle if none ever happened." -Libby Fudim

​I don't use the PM feature, so just email me direct at the address shown above.

The real answer has nothing to do with the climate. It's all about killing capitalism, the US economy, and wealth redistribution. The climate change, global warming BS is just a front. Sure the sheep are following the leader blindly along... But the leaders have something else in mind entirely.

The real answer has nothing to do with the climate. It's all about killing capitalism, the US economy, and wealth redistribution.

There lies the real conservative fear: a carbon tax. Not so sure I like that either.

It isn't the science really. The charge of bogus science is just a red herring. But, if we make the climate scientists look like money grabbing opportunists maybe it will go away. It isn't the science that's messed up, its the politics.

There lies the real conservative fear: a carbon tax. Not so sure I like that either.

It isn't the science really. The charge of bogus science is just a red herring. But, if we make the climate scientists look like money grabbing opportunists maybe it will go away. It isn't the science that's messed up, its the politics.